Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1887-04-07

been omitted, although they are fully
appreciated and are accepted in the spirit
in which we are confident they were
written. In the first place we will state
that our correspondent is mistaken
in attributing the origin of the
policy advocated by THE DEMOCRAT
to this paper. 1t had been
discussed and favored by hundreds of
persons in this city and Territory long
before it was announced in The DEMO
Graf, which advocated it as the best that
had been suggested and the one most
likely to result in success to the loyal
cause. The policy is by no means OF
Utah origin even. 1t has been adopted
at different times, when common causes
demanded, ever since the first organiza-
ton of political parties in the American
Republic. Our correspondent, in our
judgment, overestimates the difficulties
attending the nomination of Delegate to
Congress under the plan proposed by this
paper. We do not imagine that there
would be much trouble or pickering be-
tween the members of a joint COM
mittee from either the Territorial
conventions or central committees of
the two parties, over the selection of a
candidate, although there is but one to
be nominated, and none at all during the
present year. We are further confident
that the choice, whether it fell upon
either a Republican or Democrat, would
be more heartily endorsed and more gen.
orally supported by the extremists of
both parties than if the same person
were to be nominated by any other body
of loyal men in the Territory. While
not contending that this would be in
dicative of wisdom upon the part of such
extremists, we do believe it to be the
correct policy to pursue the course most
likely to secure their votes, in addition
to those of less intense partisan feel
ings. We must take human ma
ture as we find it, and
it is sometimes wise to make concessions
to its weakness in order to utilize its
strength. 1t certainly is at the present
crisis-admitting partisan spirit to be
weakness. The same reasoning holds
good in county nominations. Our cor
respondent states pretty clearly the
policy advocated by THE DEMOCRAT, but
is evidently somewhat befogged in regard
to his own. While he is inclined to the
belief, he is a little doubtful whether such
proportionate representation from athes
two parties could~be effected in EfberaI
conventions as would ward-off all politi-
cal or partisan jealusies and insure
unity of loyal action through
out the Territory. Under the
fusion plan fairness in representation
would be certain, and consequently
there could be no possible pretext for
complaint upon either side. Why, then,
not adopt the method which is sure to
steer us clear of the only rock upon
which we are liable to split? Does
"Loyal Voter" know of a single person
who would vote loyal ticket presented
by mixed or Liberal" convention who
would not support one nominated in the
manner we have suggested? Does he
not believe that the fusion plan would
unite the entire loyal element of the
Territory? What more could be ex-
pected under any different mode
of procedure? We are confident that
by joint political action of the two great
National parties, not only can be secured
the united support of the heretofore Lib
eral voters, but that hundreds and per-
haps thousands of recruits can be en-
listed from the ranks of the enemy. Is
there any possibility of gaining a dozen
under the old organization There is
everything to gain and nothing to lose by
the proposed experiment, and it will be !
wise to give it trial.